 Poster: A snowHead
|
OK, so the latest press article from today is this one in the Guardian: Ski resorts’ era of plentiful snow may be over due to climate crisis, study finds
In line with my policy of questioning anything written by a national newspaper journalist, I did follow-through on some of the academic sources referenced in the article and it seems a reasonable enough commentary. My only criticism is that although the research they mention is US-specific, they just can't resist the usual cross-reference to the Alps and pull some filler photos and extracts from previous articles. Nevertheless, the abstract of the researchers' paper 'How Climate Change is damaging the US ski industry' (Universities of Colorado & Innsbruck) is telling:
'Relative to 1960–1979, modelled average ski seasons (with snowmaking) in the 2000–2019 period have shortened between 5.5 and 7.1 days. National direct economic losses associated with lost skier visits and increased snowmaking costs are estimated at US$252 million annually. For the 2050s, regional ski seasons are projected to shorten between 14–33 days (low emissions) and 27–62 days (high emissions). The associated national direct economic losses range from US$657 to 1352 million annually.'
Personally, and subjectively, I don't see us hitting any low emissions targets. So the potential is for an average of 45 days less winter snow in the USA. Given some of the numbers we've seen for $revenue lost per non-snow day, I can't help but think that a lot of resorts will become commercially unviable. If we applied this sort of loss to the Alps, then one scenario is that by 2050, skiing will be restricted to a period from sometime like Christmas to early March. But I'd be interested in a more informed analysis than mine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| LaForet wrote: |
Personally, and subjectively, I don't see us hitting any low emissions targets. So the potential is for an average of 45 days less winter snow in the USA. Given some of the numbers we've seen for $revenue lost per non-snow day, I can't help but think that a lot of resorts will become commercially unviable. If we applied this sort of loss to the Alps, then one scenario is that by 2050, skiing will be restricted to a period from sometime like Christmas to early March. But I'd be interested in a more informed analysis than mine. |
One thing doesn’t necessarily lead to another.
The shortening of ski season doesn’t conform to the calendar of people’s free time. Christmas skiing had been marginal for far longer than people are willing to “remember”! Now, even New Year is questionable without man made snow.
On the other end of the spectrum, even with the warming climate, there’s still plenty of snow in many resorts all the way till April. High altitude resorts well into May or June. But resorts have to close because people keep asking if March is “too late to book”! 
I don’t know about Europe. But in North America, it’s common to see “Spring pass” for sale starting March 1. Unlimited skiing till the end of the season, which quite often is late April or even May, for a relatively bargain price. (E.g. Schweitzer, ID, $169, absolutely unbelievable!). I’m sure spring skiing is now shorter than decades ago due to climate change. Say from May shortened to April. But its impact on ski resort operation is probably next to zero as there’s often plenty of snow at closing date for many resorts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
I fancy a holiday.
Where do you want to go?
Pakistan?
Flooded.
Texas?
Like Canada a couple of years ago, on fire.
Ok Australia?
Also on fire
Siberia?
Was on fire, probably smouldering underground.
Japan?
Nope landslides
Chalfont St Giles?
Underwater
The Moon?
Covered in space crap.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Quote: |
But its impact on ski resort operation is probably next to zero as there’s often plenty of snow at closing date for many resorts.
|
This is true. My first season in Canada I was quite surprised to find out a lot of the locals simply pack the skis away when conditions were still very good. It gets to some point they consider "spring" and it's time to move onto the next thing regardless.
Although less snow days and shorter seasons are not great for resorts, they are perhaps not the problem. The bigger issue is random hot weeks and rain high up trashing the snow. It makes booking in advance a crapshoot, especially if your looking to get off piste. (Ok I'll accept there has always been some risk with weather l, but the odds seem to be getting worse).
Fwiw I met some people from a big resort in France looking to install the first lift of a bigger project in central Asia next summer. Suggests that perhaps skiing will be moving. I did hear that there are some places that have previously been "too cold to snow", that are expected to get more snow as they warm up a bit. Banff was the example used, but plenty of high altitude cold places out here. There's actually a road up to 3700m where you can tour up from, we joke it's the easiest 4000m peak you will ever climb.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
One of the references cited in the Canadian study is re the SkiSim2.0 computer model for ski resorts that it used. The linked paper has an interesting conclusion from the earlier work on the model, which is that high-altitude resorts seem to benefit from the pressure on other resorts if they can adapt to accommodating migrants from them. Those pressures may not necessarily be reduced season length or fewer snowfall days, but a variety of factors.
As far as my particular interest in Verbier and the 4 Vallées goes, this may mean that it makes sense for the lift company, Téléverbier, to invest now - as they are doing - in order to attract and retain customers transferring from more problematic locations. Global heating may turn out to be a net positive for them, even if their own ski season shortens. Because although fewer days of income have a revenue impact, this can be outweighed by other compensating factors, of which a tendency for increased migration of customers from other resorts is one, but not the exclusive one.
Basically, high altitude resorts can benefit from the climate-related and more routine commercial distress of other resorts, but only if they actively adapt to accommodating more customers. And these benefits can outweigh the costs of climate change. However, just sitting back and not investing won’t cut it. Which may also explain why there’s a dialogue going on between Vail Resorts and Verbier.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| LaForet wrote: |
As far as my particular interest in Verbier and the 4 Vallées goes, this may mean that it makes sense for the lift company, Téléverbier, to invest now - as they are doing - in order to attract and retain customers transferring from more problematic locations. Global heating may turn out to be a net positive for them, even if their own ski season shortens. Because although fewer days of income have a revenue impact, this can be outweighed by other compensating factors |
300CHF / day lift passes anyone?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If that’s an reference to US ticket pricing, the from some of the research done by Alpine countries, it’s very clear that Alpine resort operations are different to the US equivalents. Inasmuch as Alpine resorts sit in a much more diverse matrix of local businesses, local and regional government bodies, local cultural organisations, and residents. Plus more interventionist central and regional public authorities. So the American mega-resort owned substantially from top to bottom by one company is an exception, if it exists at all. So the questions for someone like Vail Resorts may be whether they have enough value-add to usefully augment Téléverbier’s commercial and operational capabilities, and to what extent they can align how they do business.
In other words, has Vail Resorts anything useful to offer, and have they enough in common? Just buying the latter and imposing a CHF 300 / day tariff would merely clear the slopes for a few millionaires and see the business go under after a couple of years.
And it’s interesting to consider that this may be the reverse of what we are all discussing. Namely that the Board of Vail Resorts sees potential in the expertise and experience of Alpine resort companies being applied to their US operations. Studies like the Colorado one may be spooking US resorts if the implications means they need to make radical changes to survive. If there was an Alpine company that seemed to be responding better than they are to climate change effects, then buying it might be a sound strategy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
@LaForet, ...very good points regarding vertical integration as a preferred model, and quasi-monopolistic practices. This is exactly what small service providers in Crans Montana are anxious about - businesses which have worked long and hard to establish themselves and rely on collaborative relations and goodwill with the lift service provider. Time will tell....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
Well Les Saisies should be OK with its Nordic area most definitely NOT on "flattish meadows" at 1200m @davidof,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
